依衛生福利部2013年公佈國人十大死因統計結果，癌症居於十大死因第一位且已經是連續三十一年高居首位，使得國人對罹患癌症及其長期之治療費用感到十分畏懼。國人為了能負擔癌症長期治療的高額醫療費用，遂透過保險公司各種不同的銷售通路來購買癌症保險，得以轉移其財務風險。保險公司的銷售通路包含業務員、銀行保險、保險經紀或代理人及電話行銷等等，消費者可選擇自己喜好的銷售通路來購買癌症保險，唯各銷售通路之銷售模式皆不同，銷售代理人與消費者存在資訊不對稱或逆選擇。本研究目的是利用二部實證模型(two-part model)，以台灣一家外商壽險公司於2002到2012年承保之終身癌症險契約，觀察不同通路理賠情形。實證結果顯示通路的基本特性對損失情形之影響有顯著差異｡其實證結果顯示銀行通路的理賠率會低於傳統業務員通路與電話行銷通路，但是理賠金額會高於傳統業務員通路與電話行銷通路；而傳統業務員通路與電話行銷通路之間損失率與損失金額沒有顯著差異。According to the statistics of Ministry of Health and Welfare in 2013, cancer have been the leading cause of death in Taiwan since 1982. There are different kinds of channels including the traditional-agency, bancassurance , broker, and telemarketing can be chosen by consumers'' preference. As the awareness of the medical care expense of cancer, people will buy cancer insurance through different channels in order to cover the medical expense of cancer and financial loss. The purpose of this study is using the two-part model to examine the difference of cancer claims in various channels. By using cancer insurance claims data during the period 2002-2012 from one foreign life insurance companies, the empirical results supported the channel will cause the significant differences of cancer claim. The cancer claim loss ratio of bancassurance is better telemarketing channel, while the claim amount is higher than agency or telemarketing channel. The results also found that the cancer claim loss ratio and claim amount were no difference between agency channel and telemarketing channel.